This month Jaime Roman reviews Justice for Baby Roston by Robert A. Anderson Sr.

White collar lawyers must weigh various considerations in determining how to obtain mobile phone data or limit the government’s access to data. When can the government compel a client to provide the passcode to a mobile device? What is the significance of whether an executive’s mobile phone is owned by the executive or the corporation? This article provides tips about obtaining, protecting, preserving, and reviewing data on mobile phones.

What They Are, What They Do, How Far They Fly, and What They Can Reveal About What Happened

The suspect said he fired his gun straight up in the air on the night officers surrounded his home. The prosecutor said the suspect fired in the direction of a police officer, striking and killing him. Did the suspect shoot the officer, or did another police officer shoot him? Figuring out who shot the officer requires an investigation of shotgun wads. What are shotgun wads? What can they tell us? Steven Howard explains.

Defense lawyers increasingly are dealing with cellphones and location issues. Per Call Measurement Data files provide an estimate of the location of a cellphone. (Call Detail Record files, on the other hand, provide the location of the cell tower that served a call.) Richard Miletic explains the technology used, the error rate, and the basis to exclude PCMD under Daubert.

This month Andrew George, Katie Recker, and Richard Walk review Scientific Evidence in Civil and Criminal Cases by Andre A. Moenssens, Betty Layne DesPortes, and Roderick T. Kennedy.

The Supreme Court’s Bruen decision will have a major impact across the United States. Jurisdictions will make changes to gun regulations already on the books, and lawyers will bring legal challenges to existing gun laws. Defense attorneys Zachary Newland and Catherine Turner review and explain the new standard set forth in Bruen, and they discuss how lawyers are using the new standard to challenge the constitutionality of firearm laws.

It is crucial for a defense attorney to know the background and training of the forensic nurse examiner involved in the client’s case. A forensic nurse’s initial education does not include training on how to give an expert opinion related to his or her objective findings. Through continuing education and board certification, however, it is possible for a forensic nurse to be considered an expert.

The aftermath of an accidental fire can often look the same as the aftermath of an intentionally set fire. This confounding fact has led to many false accusations. John Lentini writes that an arson determination should be viewed with great skepticism if it is based on (1) “low burning,” (2) a fire that burned “hotter than normal” or “faster than normal,” or (3) the appearance of “pour patterns” on a floor without a positive finding of an ignitable liquid in a laboratory test.

This month Gil Sapir reviews Junk Science and the American Criminal Justice System by M. Chris Fabricant.

Expert evidence is frequently exploited by prosecutors keen on securing a conviction regardless of the reliability of the expert or the expert’s methodology. Nowhere is this more prevalent than in forensic science. To combat this pervasive problem, defense lawyers need to have a thorough understanding of Federal Rule of Evidence 702 and companion rules. Rene L. Valladares and Hannah Nelson discuss the rules, summarize cases favorable to the defense, and provide useful checklists.

for Criminal Defendants

Wholesale destruction of communications evidence on agents’ cellphones and elsewhere is something that criminal defendants and their lawyers face with shocking regularity.

What are the problems with fingerprint analysis? Justin Fahringer describes a recent Daubert hearing that included testimony by latent fingerprint examiners from two law enforcement agencies. The testimony revealed that many law enforcement agencies that employ latent print examiners have struggled to evolve and have continued to utilize stale and unreliable methods.

Attorneys and courts should not simply trust that computer programs are reliable. Why should litigants have faith in evidence that purports to be accurate when the inner workings of the computer program that produced the evidence are shrouded in mystery? Source code review is necessary for a complete assessment of a program’s reliability. Tamar Lerer discusses pretrial strategies to help obtain source code when a program has not been demonstrated to be reliable.

Implicit racial bias in forensic testimony cannot be ignored as a primary driver of injustice. Janis Puracal discusses how implicit racial bias can impact forensic testimony, and she shares her family’s story.

Most types of forensics lack the statistical backing that nuclear DNA tests have. Nonetheless, the general public believes that fingerprinting, for example, is as reliable or even more reliable than DNA testing. What should be the response in the courtroom?

Richard Miletic discusses the types of data that can be extracted from a cellphone (including call history and accessed Wi-Fi networks) and from cloud accounts (including texts, emails, and location history). In addition, he lists the data stored by phone companies (location of serving cell tower and estimation of target phone location).

What are some common mistakes made by crime scene investigators during the recovery of human skeletal remains?

Law enforcement has started to use genetic genealogy websites to try to identify suspects in cold cases. How does genetic genealogy work? What should defense attorneys look for if forensic genetic genealogy is used in their cases?

This month Matthew T. Mangino reviews The Cadaver King and the Country Dentist: A True Story of Injustice in the American South by Radley Balko and Tucker Carrington.

“Surreptitious DNA sample” refers to the collection and analysis of DNA from a person without the person’s knowledge and without coercion. For example, the police may swab a suspect’s DNA from a discarded cigarette. Oded Oren outlines an argument for suppressing the DNA information extracted from the analysis of surreptitiously obtained DNA rather than suppression of the DNA itself or the physical object from which it was obtained.

“Surreptitious DNA sample” refers to the collection and analysis of DNA from a person without the person’s knowledge and without coercion. For example, the police may swab a suspect’s DNA from a discarded cigarette. Oded Oren outlines an argument for suppressing the DNA information extracted from the analysis of surreptitiously obtained DNA rather than suppression of the DNA itself or the physical object from which it was obtained.

Defense attorneys should not become overwhelmed by DNA evidence and believe they have no way to challenge the allegations. Counsel can demonstrate to jurors that other plausible explanations exist.

If an image of a perpetrator exists on a cellphone camera, video surveillance, body camera footage or social media, law enforcement can use facial recognition software to attempt to identify the person in the photo. Defense attorney Kaitlin Jackson discusses the limitations of facial recognition, and she explains how to determine if police used facial recognition in a defendant’s case. Facial recognition software is difficult to challenge, but ways exist to attack its reliability.

Due to the increased push for prosecutions in drug-related deaths, it is more important than ever for criminal justice system stakeholders to have access to accurate, standardized, and professional death investigation and death certification. Amy Hawes and Denise Martin share some of the common pitfalls in drug death investigations, discuss national recommendations for coroner and medical examiner investigations, and set forth the qualifications death investigation experts should possess.

Smartphones can create a detailed record of what their users have been doing. Wisconsin litigator Peyton Engel focuses on the traits smartphones have in common with general-purpose computers and the implications from a digital evidentiary perspective. He discusses retrieving evidence from smartphones, extracting information from cloud storage, finding evidence of a secret or hidden phone, wearable tech, issuing subpoenas for social media records, and using apps to collect evidence.